About your Search

20091101
20091130
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
for representing the united states in cases before the court. at the time there was so much litigation and fragmentation. oftentimes, the u.s. attorney's individually would represent themselves, and it would often take positions in the justice system -- the justices have had enough of that. they made it known they wanted the government to speak with one voice. so as part of the creation of the department of justice, it covers for the statute that there should be an office "learned in law," and the solicitor general with -- would take litigation matters as the attorney general should find. by tradition, overtime, the solicitor general's office has secreted the duty of representing the united states and agencies in the supreme court so that disputes about interpretation of wall -- the law can be resolved before the government takes the position of arguing in the supreme court, and the government would participate in 25% to 30% of the cases, give or take, depending on the year. as a friend of the court and a substantial additional number of cases. so the assistance will now participate in
background, there were what were called crush of videos being sold through the united states, where they would have women in high heels stamping cadence to death, stamping bodies to death -- stamping kittens to death, stamping bunnies to death, and you would hear the screams of the animals. at challenged in the context of a dogfighting video, which is also very brittle. not as brutal and depraved as the stamping of kittens, but nonetheless still very brittle and depraved. -- still very brittle and depraved. the defendant in the case said i am a documentary filmmaker, but the dogs had actually been trained and bred in the united states for the purpose of dogfighting, sent to japan. in japan, dogfighting is legal. it was taped there and then sold and traffic in the united states. it is a legal to hold or attend dogfights in virtually every state. the question is, is this the kind of speech that the first amendment protects or not? a difficult issue, and the court really struggled with it. the couple of the hypothetical they offered, and it tells you something how the court works. just
. but the state of florida argue this should be able to get life sentences without parole. in the united states right now, there are about 2500 teenagers doing life without parole. almost all for murder. only 111 teens are serving life without parole sentences for nonmurder and where are most of those teens? florida. florida has been called the toughest state on teens. these teens in this florida case are dealing with that possiblesy of a very, very long sentence. could these teens get life and would that be unconstitutional? >> they're being charged with second degree attempted murder, but really, the adult system is not set up appropriately to deal with teens. it should really stay in juvenile court. juvenile court is just for that, to deal with individuals not attached to move on to a felony-type crime. these teens should have been charged in juvenile court. the out that the judge will have in the adult court system, he could sentence them as juvenile to a lesser sentence, but it will follow them for the rest of their lives, as opposed to in a juvenile court. >> michelle, i am so torn about
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)